Marker frames.

[Deleted User]

Stop Those Shipment Of Those Marker Frames. You Can't Use The Name Nascar Without Their Permission And Then You Have To Pay A Royalty. They Will Take You To Court. Walt Mordenti

Unknown

Now, now, the sky is not falling. :eek: In talking to many car manufacturers in Detroit over the years on behalf of car clubs, they've all informed me that fees for use of trademarked names are waived for car clubs. At most, you might have to fill out a form they'll glady send you.

[Deleted User]

Dave53-7C wrote:

Now, now, the sky is not falling. :eek: In talking to many car manufacturers in Detroit over the years on behalf of car clubs, they've all informed me that fees for use of trademarked names are waived for car clubs. At most, you might have to fill out a form they'll glady send you.

We are not talking about car companies, this is NASCAR and no one can use that name without their permission and money. Walt.

Unknown

walt's garage-53 wrote:

We are not talking about car companies, this is NASCAR and no one can use that name without their permission and money. Walt.

Your right, but the thought process is the same whether we're talking about a car company or NASCAR. Let me be more specific, we're talking about companies that, per copyright and trademark laws, can own names, images, designs and a whole host of other things. Hudson was a NASCAR sponsor who paid royalties to NASCAR for the use of their property. So, if persmission were required, it would probably have to come from Chrysler since they own the rights to everything that was built, designed, owned or purchased by Hudson. If NASCAR were going to chase after people for copyright infringement, every known car manufacturer would be all over car clubs and their members. More often than not, the owners of copyright or tradedmark protected property react if someone is profiting from the substantial sale of information or reproduction of parts without required licensing. Since the objective in this case is one of fun to celebrate the rich history of Hudson and NASCAR, and not a big dollar money making scheme, I'm sure Niels won't wind up in the klink.

Browniepetersen

Sounds to me like someone should check with NASCAR?

[Deleted User]

Dave53-7C wrote:

Your right, but the thought process is the same whether we're talking about a car company or NASCAR. Let me be more specific, we're talking about companies that, per copyright and trademark laws, can own names, images, designs and a whole host of other things. Hudson was a NASCAR sponsor who paid royalties to NASCAR for the use of their property. So, if persmission were required, it would probably have to come from Chrysler since they own the rights to everything that was built, designed, owned or purchased by Hudson. If NASCAR were going to chase after people for copyright infringement, every known car manufacturer would be all over car clubs and their members. More often than not, the owners of copyright or tradedmark protected property react if someone is profiting from the substantial sale of information or reproduction of parts without required licensing. Since the objective in this case is one of fun to celebrate the rich history of Hudson and NASCAR, and not a big dollar money making scheme, I'm sure Niels won't wind up in the klink.

You don't know the powers that run NASCAR. A retired driver was going to make his own Museum with cars showing Nascar's name on them and they stopped him cold in his tracks. They are a bunch of money makers. Walt.

Unknown

You guys might be Ok with no more than you have made - might not too, some years back Chry . Corp. sued a bar owner in Jackon, WY. over his bar name was jeep's Bar , jeep was the

guys nick name , the case did go to court - jeep claimed his dad nick named him jeep at birth in the 1930s , Chry. couldnt prove otherwise and lost the case, if someone asks about the nascar Hudson frames Id claim I bought it at the Daytona 500 from a vender, Id have to side with Walt and Brownie on this one .

Jim Kilday

I completely agree with Walt and Brownie. I don't think anyone wants to find out the hard way that this use of the word NASCAR matters a great deal to NASCAR.



What one thinks they might do and what they will do can sometimes surprise the hell out of you.



NASCAR has the legal right to protest this product. Some of the comments I've read suggest they won't because it's no big deal or it would cost them too much to follow through so they will just "let it go." The problem with this argument is that if NASCAR doesn't protect their name and their corporate interests they will eventually lose the legal rights they have now under the patent, trademark and copyright laws.



So, they may end up coming after seemingly small offenders just because they have to show they intend to protect their rights under the law from usurpers both small and large.



Sure, this use may never cause NASCAR to do a thing because they may never even know about it but the easiest (and safest) way to find out is to ask NASCAR for permission to use that word and when asked, I'll bet a quart of Aberlour Malt they say NO.



Jim Kilday



PS--You would be astonished to know the amount of money that the Michael Buffer interests have spent challenging the unauthorized use of the words---"Let's Get Ready To Rumble."

Unknown

walt's garage-53 wrote:

You don't know the powers that run NASCAR. A retired driver was going to make his own Museum with cars showing Nascar's name on them and they stopped him cold in his tracks. They are a bunch of money makers. Walt.

I'm sure you're right Walt. A person using the NASCAR name (without permission) to make a profit might just get a rude awakening. If the museum you mention were private and not open to the paying public, NASCAR couldn't touch the owner. Check out what Jon mentioned in another post about scrawling Hudson - NASCAR on the side of his car.



In this case, if anyone may have a worry, it would be the company manufacturing the plate frames, not the people buying them.

[Deleted User]

Guys, people can sue for anything. If someone wants to sue me for stating a fact that the Hudson Hornet were NASCAR Champions then let them. It would be a complete PR disaster for them.

hudsontech

stateline wrote:

You guys might be Ok with no more than you have made - might not too, some years back Chry . Corp. sued a bar owner in Jackon, WY. over his bar name was jeep's Bar , jeep was the

guys nick name , the case did go to court - jeep claimed his dad nick named him jeep at birth in the 1930s , Chry. couldnt prove otherwise and lost the case, if someone asks about the nascar Hudson frames Id claim I bought it at the Daytona 500 from a vender, Id have to side with Walt and Brownie on this one .

Same thing happened in Maine a few years back - TGIF sued a small lunchonette in Kittery, Maine for using It's Friday for the name of their place. Believe it or not. The It's Fridays owners tried "It Was Friday's" - that didn't work either. It never went to court - It's Friday's owners found something else.



Hudsonly,

Alex Burr

Memphis, TN

[Deleted User]

Rick,



I'm glad you mentioned the Nissan lawsuit. I was going to change the frames to say: Hudson Hornet / Nissan Champions. LOL

Unknown

Here is one that has been going-on for years, and isn't done yet... Seems Nissan (car company) is fighting for the name with a computer company by the same name, for the internet name. Seems the computer company was known as Nissan Computers long before Datsun changed their name to Nissan, and have been trying to bully Nissan Computers into submission by a multitude of lawsuits and legal petitions...

http://www.nissan.com/

The judge hearing the Nissan vs Nissan case could have shot this down immediately by referring to Cadillac Motor Car vs Cadillac Dog Food. In that case, Cadillac Motor Car lost the case and a precedent was set since the judge hearing that case ruled that nobody could mistake a Cadillac car for a can of dog food. Similarly, who could mistake a car for a computer?

[Deleted User]

Dave53-7C wrote:

The judge hearing the Nissan vs Nissan case could have shot this down immediately by referring to Cadillac Motor Car vs Cadillac Dog Food. In that case, Cadillac Motor Car lost the case and a precedent was set since the judge hearing that case ruled that nobody could mistake a Cadillac car for a can of dog food. Similarly, who could mistake a car for a computer?

Great point Dave but the Cadillacs in the seventies and eighties WERE built like and looked like a can of dog food.... LOL

Unknown

I seem to remember when Chrysler bought AMC. They tried to stop several folks from makeing and selling parts for Hudsons. K-Gap Rubber parts and Jim Fortin who made the good fitting exhaust. Along with some other venders.

Park_W

Just for the record, Nissan was Nissan long before the use of the Datsun name, which was adopted in the late fifties or early sixties for export models to many countries, including the US. They may have thought Nissan was too obviously Japanese (remember this was not long after the time when many folks thought all Japanese stuff was junk). Or maybe the story is true of the Nissan marketing department's meeting about how quickly they needed the new name for the export models ... one attendee replied "Dot soon?"

Unknown

Look at the 2007 rulings. #1. Found that Nissan computer did not dilute NMC's mark(et?). #2. Denied NMC's request for permanent injunction.



This is just like the Cadillac vs Cadillac case, another waste of time and money.



Who cares if the plate frame manufacturer has paid royalties or gets sued. Niels is simply ordering something to be made. Whether it's legal or not is the worry of the company producing them, not the end users.